Wonktonodi said:
Final-Fan said:
I probably wouldn't have done what hat did, but once hatmoza threw his hat (hur hur) in the ring, there was exactly one right play for Linkz and he did the opposite. (The pun was entirely unintentional, but now that I've spotted it I'm giggling.)
Calling it bandwagoning is gross oversimplification. Remember, hatmoza was going to kill Happy anyway, so the only difference was that we'd confirm hatmoza's ability, at the cost of using it up. Also I wanted the day to finally end.
|
if you had more reasons it's very silly to say one reason was the only reason.
|
The other reasons weren't sufficient to make me vote hatmoza. I mean come on, it would be terrible if I voted just to end the day without a good reason to lynch someone. And, all else being equal, I would have been willing to give hatmoza the benefit of the doubt instead of immediately forcing him to prove his claim. But the ADDITIONAL fact that Happy just wasn't apparently going to get lynched made testing hatmoza's claim a very reasonable backup plan.
I "only" voted him once that became clear. Do you get it now?
(You can ignore this next part, but I find it interesting and instructive: "Variation in the placement of only can change the meaning of the sentence, as the following examples show: Dictators respect only force; they are not moved by words. Dictators only respect force; they do not worship it. She picked up the receiver only when he entered, not before. She only picked up the receiver when he entered; she didn't dial the number." http://www.thefreedictionary.com/only
(I didn't say I lynched hat only because Happy wasn't getting lynched.)